'Worn' basses - hot or not?

[Sammers]

Having an aged Sandberg myself, I'm in the hot category!

Main reason I had it relic'd, other than looking pretty cool, is because it was my first £1k+ bass purchase and I'd be horrified if had dropped it and scuffed it within the first month or so (which I did anyway haha)

This way, I don't have to worry about scuffing it AND it will always look brand new!

[Kiwi]

Wear is hard to do convincingly - but when done well, more scars during the course of gigging makes it look better!

[Grangur]

[quote name='Conan' timestamp='1389271736' post='2332137']
Good example! Except that the problem is new jeans look crap, whereas a new bass looks lovely!
[/quote] Isn't it a matter of the bass (or jeans) needs to fit your image?

[quote name='Horizontalste' timestamp='1389273961' post='2332176']
I think Sandberg do a good job but I was at a wedding once & the bassman in the band that were playing was using an aged california whilst wearing a suit. Not a good look.
[/quote] - You beat me to it!

Jaco looked right with a worn bass. He earned the right to play a worn bass as well. I'm a noob. If I played a road worn it would look stupid.

[UglyDog]

The only really good relic work I've seen is the job my mate did on his Strat. If I didn't know better, I'd swear it was 40 years old -- it looks [i]perfect[/i]. No mechanical sanders involved, just elbowgrease and taste!

[Lw.]

I don't mind the look & they often feel great to play but I'd find it hard to justify paying extra to have a normal bass sanded. If you're interested in Fenders you could get a Classic 60s "lacquer" which has the nitro finish & save the £250 fender charge to sand it for you.

Buying second hand; so long as you're getting it for a decent price I think the RW look is fine.

[Marc S]

I didn't used to like the idea of pre-roadworn guitars and basses
However, I've warmed to them recently
and I guess it depends on the quality of the "wearing" and how convincing it looks
I've seen a few recently, which look pretty good IMO

I'm not a huge fan of Fenders, but I'm really fancying a roadworn jazz at the moment....
They do look hot, to me

[discreet]

[quote name='Conan' timestamp='1389270883' post='2332109']
True - but is that not "in spite of" their relicking rather than "because of" it? They are clearly well-made basses, but does the "damaged" finish add to their appeal? I would say not - but some people must like it or they wouldn't sell!
[/quote]

All a matter of opinion of course, but I've seen much worse relic jobs than the Roadworns. They are fairly subtle, in fact. They've basically had the shine taken off them and had a few small 'wear' marks added. More an attempt to make them feel comfy and worn-in, like an old pair of slippers, rather than to make them look forty years old. ...Not that I wear slippers, but you get my drift.

A lot of relic jobs are awful though, I'll give you that. I think they [i]can [/i]be 'hot' if done with discretion, intelligence and taste. Too often a relic features heavy-handed use of the sander, but leaves the chrome hardware pristine (for example). So obvious and just wrong!

[DaytonaRik]

Can't see much wrong with this tbh!

Edited January 9, 2014 by DaytonaRik

[ezbass]

I don't mind them if the ageing has been done well and is not over the top. I have a '63 P Bass that has really seen some action during its life and wears its battle scars with aplomb. But I've also owned a Fender Roadworn P which I really liked too despite it being faux. I also like new, shiny basses. There are those who like it and those who don't, the classic Marmite analogy, but ultimately for me if a bass plays well, sounds good and the ageing doesn't look like a dog's dinner, I'm OK with it.

[BigRedX]

I'm most definitely in the not category.

Even if the wear is genuinely from playing, then unless it's your playing it is still going to look fake. A big thumb-worn patch above the bridge pickup on a Jazz isn't going to look very convincing if you play with a pick or only ever anchor your thumb over the neck pickup.

I like my basses shiny. The only one I ever bought that was suffering from extensive wear went back to the person who made it for a complete refinish and overhaul. When I got it back it was like a brand new instrument - lovely!

You can read all about it [url=http://basschat.co.uk/topic/29915-gus-g3-5-string/]here[/url].

[Geek99]

I don't see that wear and dings acquired quickly are innately less worthy than ones acquired over years of accidents and use.
If swift aging of your bass makes you feel better about playing your bass I don't see the issue with relic jobs

[Lozz196]

Uncool in looks, but the Fender Road Worns are extra-cool in playability.

[Marvin]

I personally don't like them aesthetically, but if it was the best playing bass for the money I'd go for it.

[JPJ]

Last year I put together a bitsa fretless using one of those 'roadworn' style Vintage Icon bodies. At first I thought it was cool, and it certainly got plenty of compliments but the roadworn look is wearing on me now (no pun intended). The worst thing about the Vintage versions is that the paint isn't removed down to the wood but down to a rather ineffective wood look finish (think photo-flame).
This year will see the body stripped and a nice black nitro finish applied that will be allowed to wear naturally with use.

[Dennis1971]

Not...

Bought my bass second hand, got some buckle rash, some scratched and it will get worse over time. That's way it should go in my opinion. If I buy something new I want it to look new........

[Alfie]

I wouldn't buy a reliced bass, but I am not vehemently opposed to them. It is just a finish option, like sunburst (which I wouldn't buy either)

What I am vehemently opposed to is instruments being made completely period correct, down to decal and serial numbers. This become counterfeit in my eyes.

[njr911]

[quote name='JPJ' timestamp='1389285671' post='2332393']

This year will see the body stripped and a nice black nitro finish applied that will be allowed to wear naturally with use.
[/quote]

I'd love to do this and add a funky 60's custom colour...any advice as to how?

My default position is "pay a man" how expensive would it be just to repaint a body? I understand the stripping is fairly striaghtforward.

[skankdelvar]

I can see why taste or 'ethics' might lead some to abhor relics. But the 'put the dings there yourself' argument is impractical for a number of reasons. For one thing, some of us dislike the look of a sparkly new instrument but are far too old to wait thirty years for patina to accrete.

And what about buying a genuine old instrument? If one or a number of previous owners were responsible for the visible wear, does 'truth' dictate that one should refinish it?

For me, it's one of those things that just aren't worth worrying about unless one is an assiduous but inexperienced collector of 'vintage' instruments.

Edited January 9, 2014 by skankdelvar

[iconic]

Can 'relicing' work (however poorly) on anything but a fender....for example a 'reliced' sb-1000 is just a tatty aria....isn't it?


So uncool to my mind but then i dont like tatty 'n tired.

[Guest FretNoMore]

I think they do look cool, but for me personally, I would only own one that has been aged by real use, a new but relic'ed bass is a bit "poser" to me. But to each their own, it's really no different than pre-washed jeans, kit cars and other products made to look older than they are. I hear some of these basses have other things going for them than just looks, like different pickups, necks, perfect setup etc, and that's also something to consider.

[4000]

I like 'em, providing they're done well. I don't like pristine guitars (except for stuff like Alembic); not keen on the look or feel. It also takes a long while to put the requisite wear on a new bass, assuming the finish is any good. Of course my main basses are from 1972 so have a fair bit of wear already, which is the best way to get it, but if I was buying a CS Fender it'd def be a relic.

[4000]

[quote name='Geek99' timestamp='1389280899' post='2332303']
I don't see that wear and dings acquired quickly are innately less worthy than ones acquired over years of accidents and use.
If swift aging of your bass makes you feel better about playing your bass I don't see the issue with relic jobs
[/quote]

Good post.

[machinehead]

I can take the relic look or leave the relic look but I do wonder how the f**£ some genuinely worn basses get into the state they're in.

Do the owners take them to gigs tied to a tow rope behind their car?

I own several guitars that I bought in the 70s, one is from the 60s. They were extensively gigged over the years and still look 9/10 condition today.

It makes me wonder what the fake worn basses are based on? Maybe it's ones that were accidently dropped off a ferry and were recovered in a trawlers net 30 years later?

Frank.

[Dingus]

I like new basses, and I like older basses that are in good condition . I'm not looking for player wear, mojo , provenence, relicing or any other such spurious qualities that are promoted as being assets nowadays. Brand spanking new or mint condition will be just fine. Then I can decide how and why the bass will be used, maintained and kept in good order.

[skej21]

I wish my Fender Nate Mendel precision wasn't 'road worn'... I'd rather do it myself but it's the only precision with that neck profile (which i LOVE!) so I went for it. On the plus side, the relicing on the Mendels is VERY light and is pretty hard to spot, so it isn't as extreme as the 'road worn' series instruments or the heavy relic monstrosities on ebay!!

On the whole, don't mind if it's only a little bit and a necessary evil (which in my case, it is) but as a concept it's a bit naff... It does make neck playability A LOT nicer when it's worn though ;-)